in reply to Re^3: Simple error
in thread Simple error

You're wrong

Also, you could have answered the question fifty times in the time its taken you to type up that junk 

$ lwp-download "http://perlmonks.com/?displaytype=displaycode;node_id=
+975895" foobar.pl
46.3 KB received in 1 seconds (46.3 KB/sec)

[download]

$ ack  -A0 "[^-]\btext" NUL foobar.pl
ack: NUL: No such file or directory
foobar.pl
153:   $left_frame->Label(text => "Perl Chat Client v$VERSION")
172:   $right_frame->Label(text => 'Buddies')
200:      print CONF "# You may edit this file with a text editor or\n
+";
852:        # $request is the text of the request
853:        # put text of reply into $outbuffer{$client}
1221:      print CONF "# You may edit this file with a text editor or\
+n";

[download]

$ perl -MTk -e " tkinit->Label( text => 1 );"
unknown option "text" at C:/perl/site/5.14.1/lib/MSWin32-x86-multi-thr
+ead/Tk/Widget.pm line 205.
 at -e line 1.

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Simple error
by ww (Archbishop) on Jun 14, 2012 at 02:50 UTC
    My initial reaction was to admire your method (++) and ignore your initial (tendentious) assertion.

    But, for the sake of future readers, would you be so good as to post chapter and verse of what's "wrong" with my previous post?

[reply]

      My initial reaction was to admire your method (++) and ignore your initial (tendentious) assertion.

      But, for the sake of future readers, would you be so good as to post chapter and verse of what's "wrong" with my previous post?

      The whole thing, from the nonsense about posting too much code, to the pointless regurgitation of How do I post a question effectively?, to the incredulous intimidatory junk about NodeReaper and violators

      Basically, if you ain't going to help this first time poster, don't bother him while others are actually trying to help him -- don't be a troll

      It was trivial to help the OP, but you chose to try and be witty -- you weren't witty at all

      Even the the bit about readmore tags was pointless;

      Do we need to get "in your face" about readmore-tags?

      Heck no!

      For the sake of future seekers of perlmonks wisdom, readmore tags should be automatic -- the OP managed to use code tags, readmore tags should be automatic -- hounding newbies to add readmore tags is waste of time

[reply]
        Just as you appear unable to distinguish humor from intimidation, you seems to have difficulty recognizing a difference between referencing a link covering many aspects of posting an effective question and explaining a narrow piece of same.

        But your cynical outlook on the helpfulness, or lack thereof, in explaining a local norm -- brief code -- is, itself, unhelpful. In fact, within hours, I had a message from OP with thanks for the explanation of how to do better in the future (altho it appears that the edit was done by a janitor, not the OP).

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom